This graph shows the population of the U.S. by race and ethnic group from 2000 to 2023. In 2023, there were around 21.39 million people of Asian origin living in the United States. A ranking of the most spoken languages across the world can be accessed here. U.S. populationCurrently, the white population makes up the vast majority of the United States’ population, accounting for some 252.07 million people in 2023. This ethnicity group contributes to the highest share of the population in every region, but is especially noticeable in the Midwestern region. The Black or African American resident population totaled 45.76 million people in the same year. The overall population in the United States is expected to increase annually from 2022, with the 320.92 million people in 2015 expected to rise to 341.69 million people by 2027. Thus, population densities have also increased, totaling 36.3 inhabitants per square kilometer as of 2021. Despite being one of the most populous countries in the world, following China and India, the United States is not even among the top 150 most densely populated countries due to its large land mass. Monaco is the most densely populated country in the world and has a population density of 24,621.5 inhabitants per square kilometer as of 2021. As population numbers in the U.S. continues to grow, the Hispanic population has also seen a similar trend from 35.7 million inhabitants in the country in 2000 to some 62.65 million inhabitants in 2021. This growing population group is a significant source of population growth in the country due to both high immigration and birth rates. The United States is one of the most racially diverse countries in the world.

Racial diversity is measured by a diversity index that is calculated using United States Census racial and ethnic population characteristics from the PL-94 data file. The diversity index is a quantitative measure of the distribution of the proportion of five major ethnic populations (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Two or more races). The index ranges from 0 (low diversity meaning only one group is present) to 1 (meaning an equal proportion of all five groups is present). The diversity score for the United States in 2010 is 0.60. The diversity score for the San Francisco Bay Region is 0.84. Within the region, Solano (0.89) and Alameda (0.90) Counties are the most diverse and the remaining North Bay (0.55 - 0.64) Counties are the least diverse.

Explore demographic data on the Massachusetts executive branch workforce. Track our progress toward our goals to reflect the diversity of the people we serve, and to stand out as an employer of choice.

This statistic shows the public opinion on the racial diversity of selected music genres in the United States as of May 2018, by age. During the survey, 25 percent of respondents stated that they considered rap/hip-hop to be the most racially diverse music genre.

California is home to 12 percent of the nation's population yet accounts for more than 20 percent of the people living in the nation’s hardest-to-count areas, according to the United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census Bureau). California's unique diversity, large population distributed across both urban and rural areas, and sheer geographic size present significant barriers to achieving a complete and accurate count. The state’s population is more racially and ethnically diverse than ever before, with about 18 percent of Californians speaking English “less than very well,” according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates. Because the 2020 Census online form was offered in only twelve non-English languages, which did not correspond with the top spoken language in California, and a paper questionnaire only in English and Spanish, many Californians may not have been able to access a census questionnaire or written guidance in a language they could understand. In order to earn the confidence of California’s most vulnerable populations, it was critical during the 2020 Census that media and trusted messengers communicate with them in their primary language and in accessible formats. An accurate count of the California population in each decennial census is essential to receive its equitable share of federal funds and political representation, through reapportionment and redistricting. It plays a vital role in many areas of public life, including important investments in health, education, housing, social services, highways, and schools. Without a complete count in the 2020 Census, the State faced a potential loss of congressional seats and billions of dollars in muchneeded federal funding. An undercount of California in 1990 cost an estimated $2 billion in federal funding. The potential loss of representation and critically needed funding could have long-term impacts; only with a complete count does California receive the share of funding the State deserves with appropriate representation at the federal, state, and local government levels. The high stakes and formidable challenges made this California Complete Count Census 2020 Campaign (Campaign) the most important to date. The 2020 Census brought an unprecedented level of new challenges to all states, beyond the California-specific hurdles discussed above. For the first time, the U.S. Census Bureau sought to collect data from households through an online form. While the implementation of digital forms sought to reduce costs and increase participation, its immediate impact is still unknown as of this writing, and it may have substantially changed how many households responded to the census. In addition, conditions such as the novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, a contentious political climate, ongoing mistrust and distrust of government, and rising concerns about privacy may have discouraged people to open their doors, or use computers, to participate. Federal immigration policy, as well as the months-long controversy over adding a citizenship question to the census, may have deterred households with mixed documentation status, recent immigrants, and undocumented immigrants from participating. In 2017, to prepare for the unique challenges of the 2020 Census, California leaders and advocates reflected on lessons learned from previous statewide census efforts and launched the development of a high-impact strategy to efficiently raise public awareness about the 2020 Census. Subsequently, the State established the California Complete Count – Census 2020 Office (Census Office) and invested a significant sum for the Campaign. The Campaign was designed to educate, motivate, and activate Californians to respond to the 2020 Census. It relied heavily on grassroots messaging and outreach to those least likely to fill out the census form. One element of the Campaign was the Language and Communication Access Plan (LACAP), which the Census Office developed to ensure that language and communication access was linguistically and culturally relevant and sensitive and provided equal and meaningful access for California’s vulnerable populations. The Census Office contracted with outreach partners, including community leaders and organizations, local government, and ethnic media, who all served as trusted messengers in their communities to deliver impactful words and offer safe places to share information and trusted messages. The State integrated consideration of hardest-to-count communities’ needs throughout the Campaign’s strategy at both the statewide and regional levels. The Campaign first educated, then motivated, and during the census response period, activated Californians to fill out their census form. The Census Office’s mission was to ensure that Californians get their fair share of resources and representation by encouraging the full participation of all Californians in the 2020 Census. This report focuses on the experience of the Census Office and partner organizations who worked to achieve the most complete count possible, presenting an evaluation of four outreach and communications strategies.

Ethnic diversity is generally associated with less social capital and lower levels of trust. However, most empirical evidence for this relationship is focused on generalized trust, rather than more theoretically appropriate measures of group-based trust. This paper evaluates the relationship between ethnic diversity – at national, regional, and local levels – and the degree to which coethnics are trusted more than non-coethnics, a value I call the “coethnic trust premium.” Using public opinion data from sixteen African countries, I find that citizens of ethnically diverse states express, on average, more ethnocentric trust. However, within countries, regional ethnic diversity is actually associated with less ethnocentric trust. This same negative pattern between diversity and ethnocentric trust appears across districts and enumeration areas within Malawi. I then show, consistent with these patterns, that diversity is only detrimental to intergroup trust at the national level in the presence of ethnic group segregation. These results highlight the importance of the spatial distribution of ethnic groups on intergroup relations, and question the utility of micro-level studies of interethnic interactions for understanding macro-level group dynamics.

In 2023, half of Generation Z in the United States were white. In comparison, 48 percent of Gen Alpha were white in that year, making it the first generation that does not have a majority white population in the United States.

Despite comprising of a smaller share of the U.S. population than African Americans or Hispanics, the most represented non-white U.S. CEOs were of an Asian background. They made up 55 percent of CEO positions at Fortune 500 and S&P 500 companies in 2024. By comparison, 11 percent of CEOs at the time were African American. The rise of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) Investments in ESG have risen dramatically over last few years. In November 2023 there were approximately 480 billion U.S. dollars in ESG ETF assets worldwide, compared to 16 billion U.S. dollars in 2015. ESG measures were put in place to encourage companies to act responsibly, with the leading reason for ESG investing stated to be brand and reputation according to managers and asset owners. Gender diversity With the general acceptance of ESG in larger companies, there has still been a significant employment gap of women working in senior positions. For example, the share of women working as a partner or principal at EY, one of the largest accounting firms in the world, was just only 28 percent in 2023.

Institutions of higher education (IHE) throughout the United States have a long history of acting out various levels of commitment to diversity advancement, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Despite decades of DEI “efforts,” the academy is fraught with legacies of racism that uphold white supremacy and prevent marginalized populations from full participation. Furthermore, politicians have not only weaponized education but passed legislation to actively ban DEI programs and censor general education curricula (https://tinyurl.com/antiDEI). Ironically, systems of oppression are particularly apparent in the fields of Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology (EECB)–which recognize biological diversity as essential for ecological integrity and resilience. Yet, amongst EECB faculty, people who do not identify as cis-heterosexual, non-disabled, affluent white males are poorly represented. Furthermore, IHE lack metrics to quantify DEI as a priority. Here we show that only 30.3% of US-faculty positions advertised in EECB from Jan 2019-May 2020 required a diversity statement; diversity statement requirements did not correspond with state-level diversity metrics. Though many announcements “encourage women and minorities to apply,” empirical evidence demonstrates that hiring committees at most institutions did not prioritize an applicant’s DEI advancement potential. We suggest a model for change and call on administrators and faculty to implement SMART (i.e., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) strategies for DEI advancement across IHE throughout the United States. We anticipate our quantification of diversity statement requirements relative to other application materials will motivate institutional change in both policy and practice when evaluating a candidate’s potential “fit”. IHE must embrace a leadership role to not only shift the academic culture to one that upholds DEI, but to educate and include people who represent the full diversity of our society. In the current context of political censure of education including book banning and backlash aimed at Critical Race Theory, which further reinforce systemic white supremacy, academic integrity and justice are more critical than ever. Methods Here we investigated the (lack of) process in faculty searches at IHE for evaluating candidates’ ability to advance DEI objectives. We quantified the prevalence of required diversity statements relative to research and/or teaching statements for all faculty positions posted to the Eco-Evo Jobs Board (http://ecoevojobs.net) from January 2019 - May 2020 as a proxy for institutional DEI prioritization (Supplement). We also mapped the job posts that required diversity statements geographically to gauge whether and where diversity is valued in higher education across the US. Data analysis We pulled all faculty jobs posted on Eco-Evo jobs board (http://ecoevojobs.net) from Jan 1, 2019, to May 31, 2020. For each position, we recorded the Location (i.e., state), Subject Area, Closing Date, Rank, whether or not the position is Tenure Track, and individual application materials (i.e., Research statement, Teaching statement, combined Teaching and Research statement, Diversity statement, Mentorship statement). Of the 543 faculty positions posted during this time, we eliminated 299 posts because the web links were broken or application information was no longer available (i.e., “NA”), leaving 244 faculty job posts. For each of the retained posts, we coded the requirement of teaching, research, diversity, and/or mentorship statements as follows:

"Yes” = statement required “No” = statement not required “Other” = application materials did not explicitly require a Diversity Statement (i.e., option or suggested that applicants include a statement on diversity and inclusion as a component of their teaching and/or research statement or in their cover letter)

Data visualization We created a Sankey diagram using Sankey Flow Show (THORTEC Software GmbH: www.sankeyflowshow.com) to compare diversity and representation from the general population, through (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) STEM academia (a career hierarchy often referred to as the “leaky pipeline”). We procured population data from the US Census Bureau (US Department of Commerce: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045219) and quantified the diversity/representation in Conservation Biology (https://datausa.io/profile/cip/ecology-evolution-systematics-population-biology#demographics) and Ecology (https://datausa.io/profile/cip/conservation-biology) using Data USA (developed by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and Datawheel). We used the 2015 Diversity Index (produced by PolicyLink and the USC Program for Environmental and Regional Equity: https://nationalequityatlas.org/indicators/Diversity_index/Ranking:33271/United_States/false/Year(s):2015/) to quantify relative ethnic diversity per state, and graphed Figure 2B using the tidyverse, rgdal, broom, and rgeos packages in R (see Base code used to produce Figure 2 in R, below). The Diversity index measures the representation of White, Black, Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American, and Mixed/other race in a given population. A maximum possible diversity score (1.79) would indicate even representation of all ethnic/racial groups. We checked all figures using the Color Blindness Simulator (ColBlindor: https://www.color-blindness.com/coblis-color-blindness-simulator/) to maintain inclusivity.

The State of Alabama contains the most diverse fish fauna of North America. The University of Alabama Ichthyological Collection (UAIC) documents this diversity and is one of the largest educational and research collections of fishes in the southeastern United States. This nationally and internationally recognized biological resource includes over one million preserved, skeletal, and frozen specimens, some dating back to the mid 1900's, and is the best single resource documenting past and present distributions and abundances of fishes in the State.

Diversity in Tech Statistics: In today's tech-driven world, discussions about diversity in the technology sector have gained significant traction. Recent statistics shed light on the disparities and opportunities within this industry. According to data from various sources, including reports from leading tech companies and diversity advocacy groups, the lack of diversity remains a prominent issue. For example, studies reveal that only 25% of computing jobs in the United States are held by women, while Black and Hispanic individuals make up just 9% of the tech workforce combined. Additionally, research indicates that LGBTQ+ individuals are underrepresented in tech, with only 2.3% of tech workers identifying as LGBTQ+. Despite these challenges, there are promising signs of progress. Companies are increasingly recognizing the importance of diversity and inclusion initiatives, with some allocating significant resources to address these issues. For instance, tech giants like Google and Microsoft have committed millions of USD to diversity programs aimed at recruiting and retaining underrepresented talent. As discussions surrounding diversity in tech continue to evolve, understanding the statistical landscape is crucial in fostering meaningful change and creating a more inclusive industry for all. Editor’s Choice In 2021, 7.9% of the US labor force was employed in technology. Women hold only 26.7% of tech employment, while men hold 73.3% of these positions. White Americans hold 62.5% of the positions in the US tech sector. Asian Americans account for 20% of jobs, Latinx Americans 8%, and Black Americans 7%. 83.3% of tech executives in the US are white. Black Americans comprised 14% of the population in 2019 but held only 7% of tech employment. For the same position, at the same business, and with the same experience, women in tech are typically paid 3% less than men. The high-tech sector employs more men (64% against 52%), Asian Americans (14% compared to 5.8%), and white people (68.5% versus 63.5%) compared to other industries. The tech industry is urged to prioritize inclusion when hiring, mentoring, and retaining employees to bridge the digital skills gap. Black professionals only account for 4% of all tech workers despite being 13% of the US workforce. Hispanic professionals hold just 8% of all STEM jobs despite being 17% of the national workforce. Only 22% of workers in tech are ethnic minorities. Gender diversity in tech is low, with just 26% of jobs in computer-related sectors occupied by women. Companies with diverse teams have higher profitability, with those in the top quartile for gender diversity being 25% more likely to have above-average profitability. Every month, the tech industry adds about 9,600 jobs to the U.S. economy. Between May 2009 and May 2015, over 800,000 net STEM jobs were added to the U.S. economy. STEM jobs are expected to grow by another 8.9% between 2015 and 2024. The percentage of black and Hispanic employees at major tech companies is very low, making up just one to three percent of the tech workforce. Tech hiring relies heavily on poaching and incentives, creating an unsustainable ecosystem ripe for disruption. Recruiters have a significant role in disrupting the hiring process to support diversity and inclusion. You May Also Like To Read Outsourcing Statistics Digital Transformation Statistics Internet of Things Statistics Computer Vision Statistics

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the median household income across different racial categories in United States. It portrays the median household income of the head of household across racial categories (excluding ethnicity) as identified by the Census Bureau. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into economic disparities and trends and explore the variations in median houshold income for diverse racial categories.

Key observations

Based on our analysis of the distribution of United States population by race & ethnicity, the population is predominantly White. This particular racial category constitutes the majority, accounting for 68.17% of the total residents in United States. Notably, the median household income for White households is $79,933. Interestingly, despite the White population being the most populous, it is worth noting that Asian households actually reports the highest median household income, with a median income of $106,954. This reveals that, while Whites may be the most numerous in United States, Asian households experience greater economic prosperity in terms of median household income.

https://i.neilsberg.com/ch/united-states-median-household-income-by-race.jpeg" alt="United States median household income diversity across racial categories">

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2022 1-Year Estimates.

Racial categories include:

• White
• Black or African American
• American Indian and Alaska Native
• Asian
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander
• Some other race
• Two or more races (multiracial)

Variables / Data Columns

• Race of the head of household: This column presents the self-identified race of the household head, encompassing all relevant racial categories (excluding ethnicity) applicable in United States.
• Median household income: Median household income, adjusting for inflation, presented in 2022-inflation-adjusted dollars

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for United States median household income by race. You can refer the same here

More than 39 million people and 14.2 million households span more than 163,000 square miles of Californian’s urban, suburban and rural communities. California has the fifth largest economy in the world and is the most populous state in the nation, with nation-leading diversity in race, ethnicity, language and socioeconomic conditions. These characteristics make California amazingly unique amongst all 50 states, but also present significant challenges to counting every person and every household, no matter the census year. A complete and accurate count of a state’s population in a decennial census is essential. The results of the 2020 Census will inform decisions about allocating hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding to communities across the country for hospitals, fire departments, school lunch programs and other critical programs and services. The data collected by the United States Census Bureau (referred hereafter as U.S. Census Bureau) also determines the number of seats each state has in the U.S. House of Representatives and will be used to redraw State Assembly and Senate boundaries. California launched a comprehensive Complete Count Census 2020 Campaign (referred to hereafter as the Campaign) to support an accurate and complete count of Californians in the 2020 Census. Due to the state’s unique diversity and with insights from past censuses, the Campaign placed special emphasis on the hardest-tocount Californians and those least likely to participate in the census. The California Complete Count – Census 2020 Office (referred to hereafter as the Census Office) coordinated the State’s operations to complement work done nationally by the U.S. Census Bureau to reach those households most likely to be missed because of barriers, operational or motivational, preventing people from filling out the census. The Campaign, which began in 2017, included key phases, titled Educate, Motivate and Activate. Each of these phases were designed to make sure all Californians knew about the census, how to respond, their information was safe and their participation would help their communities for the next 10 years.

This map layer shows the prevalent generations that make up the population of the United States using multiple scales. As of 2018, the most predominant generations in the U.S. are Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964), Millennials (born 1981-1998), and Generation Z (born 1999-2016). Currently, Millennials are the most predominant population in the U.S.A generation represents a group of people who are born around the same time and experience world events and trends during the same stage of life through similar mediums (for example, online, television, print, or radio). Because of this, people born in the same generation are expected to have been exposed to similar values and developmental experiences, which may cause them to exhibit similar traits or behaviors over their lifetimes. Generations provide scientists and government officials the opportunity to measure public attitudes on important issues by people’s current position in life and document those differences across demographic groups and geographic regions. Generational cohorts also give researchers the ability to understand how different developmental experiences, such as technological, political, economic, and social changes, influence people’s opinions and personalities. Studying people in generational groups is significant because an individual’s age is a conventional predictor for understanding cultural and political gaps within the U.S. population.Though there is no exact equation to determine generational cutoff points, it is understood that we designate generational spans based on a 15- to 20-year gap. The only generational period officially designated by the U.S. Census Bureau is based on the surge of births after World War II in 1946 and a significant decline in birth rates after 1964 (Baby Boomers). From that point, generational gaps have been determined by significant political, economic, and social changes that define one’s formative years (for example, Generation Z is considered to be marked by children who were directly affected by the al Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001).In this map layer, we visualize six active generations in the U.S., each marked by significant changes in American history:The Greatest Generation (born 1901-1924): Tom Brokaw’s 1998 book, The Greatest Generation, coined the term ‘the Greatest Generation” to describe Americans who lived through the Great Depression and later fought in WWII. This generation had significant job and education opportunities as the war ended and the postwar economic booms impacted America.The Silent Generation (born 1925-1945): The title “Silent Generation” originated from a 1951 essay published in Time magazine that proposed the idea that people born during this period were more cautious than their parents. Conflict from the Cold War and the potential for nuclear war led to widespread levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation.Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964): Baby Boomers were named after a significant increase in births after World War II. During this 20-year span, life was dramatically different for those born at the beginning of the generation than those born at the tail end of the generation. The first 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers I) grew up in an era defined by the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War, in which a lot of this generation either fought in or protested against the war. Baby Boomers I tended to have great economic opportunities and were optimistic about the future of America. In contrast, the last 10 years of Baby Boomers (Baby Boomers II) had fewer job opportunities and available housing than their Boomer I counterparts. The effects of the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal led a lot of second-wave boomers to lose trust in the American government. Generation X (born 1965-1980): The label “Generation X” comes from Douglas Coupland’s 1991 book, Generation X: Tales for An Accelerated Culture. This generation was notoriously exposed to more hands-off parenting, out-of-home childcare, and higher rates of divorce than other generations. As a result, many Gen X parents today are concerned about avoiding broken homes with their own kids.Millennials (born 1981-1998): During the adolescence of Millennials, America underwent a technological revolution with the emergence of the internet. Because of this, Millennials are generally characterized by older generations to be technologically savvy.Generation Z (born 1999-2016): Generation Z or “Zoomers” represent a generation raised on the internet and social media. Gen Z makes up the most ethnically diverse and largest generation in American history. Like Millennials, Gen Z is recognized by older generations to be very familiar with and/or addicted to technology.Questions to ask when you look at this mapDo you notice any trends with the predominant generations located in big cities? Suburbs? Rural areas?Where do you see big clusters of the same generation living in the same area?Which areas do you see the most diversity in generations?Look on the map for where you, your parents, aunts, uncles, and grandparents live. Do they live in areas where their generation is the most predominant?

In 2023, California had the highest Hispanic population in the United States, with over 15.76 million people claiming Hispanic heritage. Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinois rounded out the top five states for Hispanic residents in that year. History of Hispanic people Hispanic people are those whose heritage stems from a former Spanish colony. The Spanish Empire colonized most of Central and Latin America in the 15th century, which began when Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas in 1492. The Spanish Empire expanded its territory throughout Central America and South America, but the colonization of the United States did not include the Northeastern part of the United States. Despite the number of Hispanic people living in the United States having increased, the median income of Hispanic households has fluctuated slightly since 1990. Hispanic population in the United States Hispanic people are the second-largest ethnic group in the United States, making Spanish the second most common language spoken in the country. In 2021, about one-fifth of Hispanic households in the United States made between 50,000 to 74,999 U.S. dollars. The unemployment rate of Hispanic Americans has fluctuated significantly since 1990, but has been on the decline since 2010, with the exception of 2020 and 2021, due to the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents the detailed breakdown of the count of individuals within distinct income brackets, categorizing them by gender (men and women) and employment type - full-time (FT) and part-time (PT), offering valuable insights into the diverse income landscapes within State Center. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based income distribution within the State Center population, aiding in data analysis and decision-making..

Key observations

• Employment patterns: Within State Center, among individuals aged 15 years and older with income, there were 559 men and 564 women in the workforce. Among them, 328 men were engaged in full-time, year-round employment, while 299 women were in full-time, year-round roles.
• Annual income under $24,999: Of the male population working full-time, 4.57% fell within the income range of under $24,999, while 7.36% of the female population working full-time was represented in the same income bracket.
• Annual income above $100,000: 13.41% of men in full-time roles earned incomes exceeding $100,000, while 3.01% of women in full-time positions earned within this income bracket.
• Refer to the research insights for more key observations on more income brackets ( Annual income under $24,999, Annual income between $25,000 and $49,999, Annual income between $50,000 and $74,999, Annual income between $75,000 and $99,999 and Annual income above $100,000) and employment types (full-time year-round and part-time)

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates.

Income brackets:

• $1 to $2,499 or loss
• $2,500 to $4,999
• $5,000 to $7,499
• $7,500 to $9,999
• $10,000 to $12,499
• $12,500 to $14,999
• $15,000 to $17,499
• $17,500 to $19,999
• $20,000 to $22,499
• $22,500 to $24,999
• $25,000 to $29,999
• $30,000 to $34,999
• $35,000 to $39,999
• $40,000 to $44,999
• $45,000 to $49,999
• $50,000 to $54,999
• $55,000 to $64,999
• $65,000 to $74,999
• $75,000 to $99,999
• $100,000 or more

Variables / Data Columns

• Income Bracket: This column showcases 20 income brackets ranging from $1 to $100,000+..
• Full-Time Males: The count of males employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Males: The count of males employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket
• Full-Time Females: The count of females employed full-time year-round and earning within a specified income bracket
• Part-Time Females: The count of females employed part-time and earning within a specified income bracket

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for State Center median household income by race. You can refer the same here

This national, tract-level experienced racial segregation dataset uses data for over 66 million anonymized and opted-in devices in Cuebiq’s Spectus Clean Room data to estimate 15 minute time overlaps of device stays in 38.2m x 19.1m grids across the United States in 2022. We infer a probability distribution of racial backgrounds for each device given their home Census block groups at the time of data collection, and calculate the probability of a diverse social contact during that space and time. These measures are then aggregated to the Census tract and across the whole time period in order to preserve privacy and develop a generalizable measure of the diversity of a place. We propose that this dataset is a better measurement of the segregation and diversity as it is experienced, which we show diverges from standard measurements of segregation. The data can be used by researchers to better understand the determinants of experienced segregation; beyond research, we suggest this data can be used by policy makers to understand the impacts of policies designed to encourage social mixing and access to opportunities such as affordable housing and mixed-income housing, and more.

For the purposes of enhanced privacy, home census block groups were pre-calculated by the data provider, and all calculations are done at the Census tract, with tracts that have more than 20 unique devices over the period of analysis.

I have lived all over this great state and have spent time in every corner, so just making a recommendation on a single solitary community will not do. If it pleases the commission, I would like to submit the attached file as a recommendation for 2021's redistricted congressional map. CO-01 - The 1st would shed its northern and eastern portions while shifting south to accommodate the new 8th. It would be an extremely wealthy district containing the upper class suburbs of Denver, as well as Columbine, Ken Caryl, Centennial, and Highlands Ranch. CO-02 - The 2nd would shift eastward, shedding its mountain communities while taking in Greeley and Longmont to become a truly Northern Colorado district. CO-03 - The western-based 3rd would take in the mountain communities of the 2nd while letting go of historically, culturally, and hydrologically separate portions of southern Colorado. CO-04 - The 4th would become a Southern Colorado district, stretching from the south of Colorado Springs to Pueblo, down across the San Luis Valley, and concluding in Durango and Cortez. Additionally, this district would become the 2nd most diverse in the state, and an extremely competitive district at that! CO-05 - The 5th would be based in the north portions of Colorado Springs, an area unique to the south of the city in its demographics, wealth, and ties to the United States Air Force. It would take in the entirety of culturally similar Eastern Colorado, ensuring that this sparsely populated region of ~100,000 people would maintain its voice in Washington. CO-06 - The 6th would move out of Brighton and Thornton, with Parker absorbed in its entirety as it so closely resembles south Aurora in wealth, demographics, and travel habits. Previously the most malformed district the new 6th would be incredibly compact! CO-07 - The 7th remains largely unchanged, save for parts lost to the 8th and a continued move up I-25 as growing neighborhoods continue to sprout up from old farmlands. CO-08 - The 8th would be the most diverse district in the state, taking in the largely Hispanic portions for west Denver and Adams County. Previously divided between the old 1st, 6th, and 7th, this district would ensure a united voice for a previously underrepresented community in Colorado In summary: 4 districts are centered around Denver, matching the 50% of the state's population that lives in Denver, Adams, Arapahoe, Jefferson, Douglas, and Broomfield counties (i.e., the Denver Metro Area minus Boulder County). Four districts represent the four unique "corners" of our state outside of Denver: Southern Colorado, the Eastern Plains, Northern Colorado, and the Western Slope. These districts contain contiguous communities, following highways and major roads to ensure easy travel for our future representatives. Finally, they are of course as equal to one another in population as can be expected, however minor adjustments will likely need to be made once proper census numbers are made available. Thank you for your time. *Please note that previous attempts at this submission were made using .geojson and .csv files, however the website did not recognize them and produced an error. Therefore I have attached a .png, the only other functional format I have available.

Report on Demographic Data in New York City Public Schools, 2020-21Enrollment counts are based on the November 13 Audited Register for 2020. Categories with total enrollment values of zero were omitted. Pre-K data includes students in 3-K. Data on students with disabilities, English language learners, and student poverty status are as of March 19, 2021. Due to missing demographic information in rare cases and suppression rules, demographic categories do not always add up to total enrollment and/or citywide totals. NYC DOE "Eligible for free or reduced-price lunch” counts are based on the number of students with families who have qualified for free or reduced-price lunch or are eligible for Human Resources Administration (HRA) benefits. English Language Arts and Math state assessment results for students in grade 9 are not available for inclusion in this report, as the spring 2020 exams did not take place. Spring 2021 ELA and Math test results are not included in this report for K-8 students in 2020-21. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic’s complete transformation of New York City’s school system during the 2020-21 school year, and in accordance with New York State guidance, the 2021 ELA and Math assessments were optional for students to take. As a result, 21.6% of students in grades 3-8 took the English assessment in 2021 and 20.5% of students in grades 3-8 took the Math assessment. These participation rates are not representative of New York City students and schools and are not comparable to prior years, so results are not included in this report. Dual Language enrollment includes English Language Learners and non-English Language Learners. Dual Language data are based on data from STARS; as a result, school participation and student enrollment in Dual Language programs may differ from the data in this report. STARS course scheduling and grade management software applications provide a dynamic internal data system for school use; while standard course codes exist, data are not always consistent from school to school. This report does not include enrollment at District 75 & 79 programs. Students enrolled at Young Adult Borough Centers are represented in the 9-12 District data but not the 9-12 School data. “Prior Year” data included in Comparison tabs refers to data from 2019-20. “Year-to-Year Change” data included in Comparison tabs indicates whether the demographics of a school or special program have grown more or less similar to its district or attendance zone (or school, for special programs) since 2019-20. Year-to-year changes must have been at least 1 percentage point to qualify as “More Similar” or “Less Similar”; changes less than 1 percentage point are categorized as “No Change”. The admissions method tab contains information on the admissions methods used for elementary, middle, and high school programs during the Fall 2020 admissions process. Fall 2020 selection criteria are included for all programs with academic screens, including middle and high school programs. Selection criteria data is based on school-reported information. Fall 2020 Diversity in Admissions priorities is included for applicable middle and high school programs. Note that the data on each school’s demographics and performance includes all students of the given subgroup who were enrolled in the school on November 13, 2020. Some of these students may not have been admitted under the admissions method(s) shown, as some students may have enrolled in the school outside the centralized admissions process (via waitlist, over-the-counter, or transfer), and schools may have changed admissions methods over the past few years. Admissions methods are only reported for grades K-12. "3K and Pre-Kindergarten data are reported at the site level. See below for definitions of site types included in this report. Additionally, please note that this report excludes all students at District 75 sites, reflecting slightly lower enrollment than our total of 60,265 students

How racially diverse are residents in Massachusetts? This topic shows the demographic breakdown of residents by race/ethnicity and the increases in the Non-white population since 2010.